Skip to content

UPDATE: Miguel Cabrera, Tigers agree to extension; will make $292M over next 10 years

Mar 27, 2014, 8:10 PM EST

Miguel Cabrera AP

UPDATE: CBS Sports’ Jon Heyman reports that the deal includes two vesting options valued at $30 million each. If Cabrera maxes out the deal, he could make as much as $352 million over 12 years.

6:56 p.m. ET: The new money in the deal works out to eight years and $248 million, per FOX Sports’ Jon Paul Morosi. That’s an AAV (average annual value) of $31 million, which would surpass Clayton Kershaw for the highest in baseball history.

The total commitment over the next 10 years will be around $292 million. That figure was first floated by Chris Cotillo of MLB Daily Dish.

6:37 p.m. ET: According to ESPN’s Jerry Crasnick, the extension will be for 10 years and just under $300 million. The deal includes the two years remaining on Cabrera’s current contract and eight additional years. It will take him through 2023 and his age-40 season.

Cabrera was set to make $44 million from 2014-2015, so depending on the structure, the deal could include around $250 million in new money. That would put him in the stratosphere of the two Alex Rodriguez contracts ($275 million and $252 million), which are the richest in baseball history. Albert Pujols and Robinson Cano ($240 million) are tied for third.

6:15 p.m. ET: FOX Sports’ Jon Paul Morosi reports that the new deal will add at least six years on to Cabrera’s current contract, which is set to expire after 2015. He will receive an AAV (average annual value) of around $30 million in those six years, which means that the Tigers’ commitment to Cabrera over the entire eight-year span will be at least $224 million. We should know more soon.

6:06 p.m. ET: CBS Sports’ Jon Heyman reports that the Tigers and Cabrera have reached agreement on an extension. It’s believed to be for at least seven years.

FOX Sports’ Jon Paul Morosi hears that the AAV (average annual value) is expected to be around $30 million, which would be a new record for a position player. If these reports are accurate, we’re likely looking at a guarantee of at least $210 million.

5:30 p.m. ET: Detroit may have missed its chance to extend Max Scherzer‘s contract before he hits the open market, but Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com reports that the Tigers are close to a long-term contract extension with two-time MVP Miguel Cabrera.

Cabrera has two more seasons remaining on an eight-year, $152 million deal, with $22 million salaries owed in 2014 and 2015, but so far at least there’s no word on the specifics of the extension.

This is Cabrera’s age-31 season and he followed up winning the traditional Triple Crown in 2012 by winning the sabermetric Triple Crown last season, leading the league in batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Combined over the past four seasons he hit .337 with a 1.037 OPS while averaging 39 homers, 40 doubles, 88 walks, and 127 RBIs.

Albert Pujols’ ten-year, $240 million deal with the Angels and Joey Votto‘s ten-year, $225 million deal with the Reds would seemingly be pretty good starting points for a Cabrera extension and it’s tough to imagine him getting less than $200 million considering Prince Fielder got $214 million from the Tigers as a free agent two offseasons ago.

  1. uyf1950 - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:10 PM

    That’s great that the Tigers put their money where their month is when it comes to re-signing Cabrera. But need I remind everyone that the Tigers on have 2 starters under contract after this year. Granted they are 2 of the very best in Verlander and Sanchez. But they are going to need more quality then that.

    • weaselpuppy - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:43 PM

      incorrect. Porcello is under team control in 2015 as a Super 2 with 4 aribtration years. Smyly is under team control through 2018 also as a Super 2. Look it up yourself at Cots Ocntracts or various other sources.

      So yes, they likely will be missing Max. But they will have the money from his $15.5M to afford the upcoming increases to AJax, Avila and Porcello.

      here’s to hoping Robby Ray is a DD stealth move

      • uyf1950 - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:04 PM

        I’ll give you Porcello that was my mistake but Smyly made virtually all of his 2013 appearances in relief. I’m not sure he would qualify as a starter, but I certainly could be wrong. I’m not that familiar with him.

      • weaselpuppy - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:10 PM

        Tiger fans screw up Porcellos contract status, no worries.

        Smyly came up as a starter but was blocked….no more as he’s in the rotation, even less so after max shoves off outta town. But he’s a nice arm, plus a lefty! Finally.

        They need this Ray kid or one of the lottery tickets like Thompson to pan out now over the next 2 years..and Moya in RF too….or Devon Thomas at 2b to shift Kinsler to OF…..gotta get cheap youngsters to handle contracts like this and JVs.

  2. chc4 - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:17 PM

    This is a clear indication that Latinos don’t receive fair treatment from teams/owners.

  3. doctorofsmuganomics - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:28 PM

    Well deserved. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves or ignorant.

    • rdanie29 - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:33 PM

      I am neither. And I defy you to show me ANY 40 year old who is worth 31 million a year. Or 39 year old, or 38 year old, or 37 year old for that matter. And if you think they are, you are either kidding yourself or an idiot.

      • happytwinsfan - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:43 PM

        i generally agree with you, but you gotta admit barry bonds was, and i don’t think that was all roids.

    • jonrox - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:33 PM

      You shouldn’t be paying players for past performance; you should be paying for expected future performance. Anyone who thinks Cabrera will be worth $30m per year after a couple more years is kidding themselves or ignorant

      • biasedhomer - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:04 PM

        It pretty much is pay him that or let him walk/force a trade to a team willing to sign him.

        And if they let him leave, their WS hopes go down the drain.

      • weaselpuppy - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:12 PM

        The entire system is set up to pay on past performance. Avoiding that means you are the Marlins.

  4. sdelmonte - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:29 PM

    Someday this will look really, really stupid. Maybe when Scherzer goes to the Bronx or Boston or Texas. But that day is not today. Today, the best hitter not named Trout is getting his due.

    • deep64blue - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:39 PM

      Actually it looks really, really stupid today – they had him under contract for another two years, absolutely no need to do this.

  5. disgracedfury - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:31 PM

    Another 10 year contract he won’t live up to.They had to do it but in 5 years he’ll be done.

  6. happytwinsfan - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:39 PM

    they should have pulled a cardinals, enjoying the last two years of his contract which will probably be the last of his peak years. then gone through the motions of appearing to try and resign him, just enough to prevent a fan base revolt.

    it was their duty to entice the yankees or dodgers to squander much of their financial advantage by over paying for his declining years. ernie harwell would disapprove.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:39 PM

      Booooo!

      You know what Ilitch just did? He gave Detroit two future Hall of Famers who are going to go in wearing the OE D. And, he made sure when he goes, good baseball will remain in Detroit and that won’t be up to any potentially cheap-ass heirs to decide. He’s spending it his way before he dies — and you know he won’t likely see the end of these contracts.

      • paperlions - Mar 28, 2014 at 7:51 AM

        Two HOFers? Who’s the 2nd one? Verlander has a LOT of work left to do be a HOFer, especially for starting pitchers, making the HOF is really tough due to established standards and injury potential.

        Besides, having someone inducted into the HOF while your team sucks is like having the ROY on a team that loses 90 games. It’s nice, but not as good as watching a good baseball team.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 28, 2014 at 9:56 AM

        It’s nice It makes money for the team…

        Fixed that for you.

      • paperlions - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:01 AM

        Citation needed.

      • paperlions - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:02 AM

        The thing that teams can control that makes them money is winning baseball games. Adding star players isn’t a draw, possible future HOF players isn’t a draw, winning games packs the park and gets TVs tuned in.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:04 AM

        You are so wrong. Signing star players assures jersey sales and all kinds of other things. Teams don’t make money off of championships so much as the sales/trappings that come with it. You focus too much on the field. It’s a business and you are treating it as a sport.

      • paperlions - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:06 AM

        There have been studies of this, it does work that way. People don’t my more jersey’s because star players are signed, they just buy different jerseys.

        Teams make a crap ton of money making the playoffs, every playoff game represents many millions in extra profit that they don’t have to share with players.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:10 AM

        Citation needed. This is just like NCAA players who generate income for the league/schools (but don’t get paid). People bought lots of stuff with Miggy winning a triple crown (aside from playoff merch) and if you think the Tigers don’t sell a crap ton of Cabrera jerseys (and Verlander) even though they don’t have a WS win, you are so wrong.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:30 AM

        People bought lots of stuff with Miggy winning a triple crown (aside from playoff merch) and if you think the Tigers don’t sell a crap ton of Cabrera jerseys (and Verlander) even though they don’t have a WS win, you are so wrong.

        That money is also split among the rest of the teams as part of the revenue sharing plan. Not sure where the Tigers rank, but I’d imagine they were in the top 15 markets:

        http://www.fangraphs.com/library/business/revenue-sharing/

      • historiophiliac - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:32 AM

        Yes, this deal makes everyone money.

  7. jason9696 - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:54 PM

    That’ll buy him a lot of alcohol.

    • historiophiliac - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:52 AM

      Meanwhile, you are still not rich or funny.

  8. davresnick - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:02 PM

    He’s going to have a difficult time feeding his family. What a f…..g joke.

  9. thebigwhitecat - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:03 PM

    That’ll buy a lot of yoga mats.

  10. churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:10 PM

    Holy crap if this is true:

    This keeps getting better and better!

  11. genericcommenter - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:22 PM

    He won’t be worth $30 million in 10 years, but he could be worth $300 million over the next 5-6.

  12. kretinous - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:37 PM

    I think he will celebrate this newfound wealth with some domestic violence and dui!

  13. cjvirnig - Mar 27, 2014 at 8:40 PM

    As a Twins fan, I LOVE this deal. In 5 years, the Tigers are going to be a dumpster fire financially. They’re going to be paying $55 million per year for Miguel Cabrera and Justin Verlander who will BOTH be in severe decline. They’re going to make the Yankees current finances look mild by comparison.

    The best part is that Cabrera won’t even come close to putting up the same production that he has over the last three seasons. They’ll be paying him $30 million a year to hit .265 with 20 HR for a majority of this deal when he’s 35+ years old.

    They would have been infinitely wiser to give the money to Max Scherzer. Did Dombrowski learn nothing during the 2012 World Series when the Giants completely shut down Detroit’s offense?

    • xjokerz - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:07 PM

      you sound like a twins fan, always living for the future

      lol @ you think we care what happens in 5 year, this is about winning now.

      poor twins fans

      and BTW, Detroits TV rights get a big boost in revenue in 2 years

      • paperlions - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:26 PM

        This contract isn’t about winning now, because he was already under contract for this year and next. This is just bad business and bad roster construction. He isn’t exactly the best athlete, who knows when or how quickly he’ll decline, but he doesn’t profile as a guy that will be a useful player in his late 30s or 40s.

      • cjvirnig - Mar 27, 2014 at 10:16 PM

        I agree they’re trying to win now, but I would argue that the juiciest portion of the Tigers championship window has already come and gone. In fact, if they don’t win the World Series this season, I’d say their chances drop exponentially once they lose Scherzer to free agency.

        My original comments still stands. Did Dave Dombrowski learn nothing from the 2012 World Series when his mighty lineup was totally silenced by the SF Giants pitching staff? Good pitching beats good hitting EVERY TIME and every team in the playoffs has good pitching.

        Part of me suspects Dombrowski will be Bud Selig’s replacement as commissioner, so he won’t even be there when the Tigers become the biggest financial train wreck in the history of professional sports.

      • detroitr1 - Mar 28, 2014 at 8:10 AM

        “Good pitching beats good hitting EVERY TIME and every team in the playoffs has good pitching.”

        …So Verlander/Scherzer/Sanchez isn’t good pitching? You do realize that Dombrowski is the one who acquired Fister from the Mariners, Scherzer from the Diamondbacks and Sanchez from the Marlins?

        How’s the Twins rotation looking? Did Vance Worley workout? No? Crickets?

    • weaselpuppy - Mar 28, 2014 at 12:18 AM

      The Twins haven’t had a MLB caliber starting pitcher for 5 years….

      The Tigers didn’t have Scherzer 5 years ago…they’ll find another guy or two in 5 years…resourceful GMs and owners willing to spend find a way, loser franchises cry about contract values and the best AL player and pitcher declining at some point in the future.

      In 5 years Sano MIGHT be playing MLB and MIGHT be able to field a position….but maybe not….

      • cjvirnig - Mar 28, 2014 at 2:04 AM

        Yes, and 5 years ago the Twins beat the Tigers in that epic game 163…or did you forget that already? Yes, you see, the Twins actually win the AL Central 6 times in 8 years.

        Or did you forget that, too?

        Trust me, in a couple years when the Byron Buxton and Miguel Sano put the Twins back atop the division, I’ll be laughing as I watch an old and out of shape Miguel Cabrera hit .260 while making $31 million.

        Enjoy it now ’cause it ain’t gonna last. You know this.

  14. erniecohen - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:37 PM

    Ignoring the contract they already had, they are paying him $31M per year for his years from age 33-41. Optimistic projection gives him WARs of something like 5.8, 5.3, 4.6, 4.0, 3.5, 3.0, 2.7, 2.3, for 30.2 WAR. That’s $8M/WAR, which is almost twice the current going rate for position players, but only about 25% over the going rate for 1B, which is generally overpaid.

    So it’s not likely to be a good contract (particularly given that they could have waited for two years to see if he suffered greater than expected decline), but if they are lucky (or if salaries rise seriously) it might not be too bad. Of course, if he starts to decline, they will be very sorry.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:50 PM

      That’s $8M/WAR, which is almost twice the current going rate for position players,

      $/WAR is running about 7.4/7.8 depending on what methodology you are using. It hasn’t been around $4M for years.

      http://www.hardballtimes.com/methodology-and-calculations-of-dollars-per-war/

  15. rcali - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:45 PM

    Price of everything just went up in Tiger land. City might be bankrupt but not the team!

    • xjokerz - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:56 PM

      you know damn well 99% of us who go to Detroit sports games dont live in the city, so who cares?

      MOVE EM TO THE BURBS!

      Oakland county please.

  16. jm91rs - Mar 27, 2014 at 10:43 PM

    The market has changed guys. Clearly these teams are expecting huge pay days from TV deals. Until that bubble bursts, 20 mil per year for good players will be the norm. Of course great players will start pushing 30 mil.

  17. scatterbrian - Mar 28, 2014 at 12:10 AM

    Remember when the Ryan Howard extension was the Ryan Howard Extension?

  18. chargrz - Mar 28, 2014 at 12:50 AM

    This makes the Pujols signing look good.

    • uyf1950 - Mar 28, 2014 at 7:15 AM

      No it doesn’t.

  19. uyf1950 - Mar 28, 2014 at 7:15 AM

    There has been ongoing talk/rumors about and extension/contract for Trout in the neighborhood of 6 years and $150MM = $25MM AAV. The Angels can forget about getting away that cheap after the Tigers deal with Cabrera. I have to think 10 years and $300MM is the absolute minimum Trout will sign an extension for now. Trout is only 22 now he doesn’t turn 23 until August and he becomes a FA after the 2017 season when he will be just 26 years old. Any extension for Trout between now and prior to him becoming a FA is going to cost the Angels huge in both years and dollars..

  20. 13arod - Mar 28, 2014 at 7:49 AM

    trout is going to surpass this easy

  21. coltzfan166 - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:51 AM

    Robinson Cano is speechless!

  22. the8man - Mar 28, 2014 at 1:03 PM

    Ugh. This guy is going to be solely a DH in about five years, if not sooner. I would have waited and eaten it later, if I had to.

  23. irishmanknowsall - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:43 AM

    Ty Cobb, Christy Mathewson, Walter Johnson, Denton Cy Young, Babe Ruth, et al, just rolled over in their graves. Branch Rickey and Mr. Comiskey and Walter O’Malley and Tom Yawkey joined them.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Maddon has high hopes for Cubs
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. P. Sandoval (5069)
  2. H. Ramirez (4417)
  3. Y. Tomas (4116)
  4. J. Lester (3100)
  5. C. Headley (2742)
  1. Y. Cespedes (2301)
  2. M. Kemp (2203)
  3. A. LaRoche (1768)
  4. C. Hamels (1765)
  5. J. Upton (1704)